grzegorz wrote:Congresswomen Barbara Lee was one of the few (if only) who voted against the war in Iraq. At the time she was crucified and now she is a hero. Time will tell, perhaps years from now John Lewis's stance will pay off. Personally I have no problem with anyone not attending, it is free country not a dictatorship and in some ways it is the most polite form of resistance.

Like Putin said, is America a banana republic?

Yes, it is.

Yeah, she was the only one. I think she said it was all just going a bit too fast.

I disagree with Lewis' stance on this in general, that it's too divisive

Being "too divisive" is like being "too pregnant." Anyway, there are lots of people who won't be attending or watching the inauguration. Lewis just gave his reasons for not going. Let's leave out the issue of whether disrespecting the president by questioning his legitimacy is divisive. If it is, it's certainly not Lewis who started it; and, I won't hold him to a higher standard than any other politician. So, if Lewis and others stand and call Trump a liar on the floor of Congress during his State of the Union address, people will say that it's disrespectful. Would it be divisive? I guess it depends on how one took it.

Anyway, the issue of Trump's legitimacy is really separate from any demonstration about it. I.e., just because Lewis says that Trump is illegitimate, that doesn't make it so. Remember. Anyone can claim anything about anyone, and anyone can believe it if he chooses to. Those are the new post-truth rules, no? I could post links to plenty of bloggers who make claims about Trump and friends. Are they true? Dunno. Are they automatically false? Dunno that either.

Anyway, if Lewis kissed Trump's feet on inauguration day, there would be no less division. The only way to not be divisive is to be cooperative and help each other. "Love thy neighbor," "do unto others," etc. Yes, that is precisely the approach Lewis and others used in the 60s to fight segregation. Yes, if Lewis took the same path today, it wouldn't be divisive. It might be better; but, otoh, from his pov, it'd be going back 50 years. So, I think there's more than Russia involved in Lewis's protest.

50 years ago, though, I was also against "protests" and "demonstrations" because they just waste energy. That includes getting upset about other peoples' protests. Arguing about whether Lewis or Trump is divisive is divisive. I am not going to act any differently toward anyone or group because Lewis doesn't attend, no matter what his reason was. I think there are people who'll say "See, see" and use it to confirm their opinions, beliefs, prejudices and to justify their actions.

Probably the thing that got me was the Russia part. It just feels like the beginning of another Cold War.

Lewis probably has a lot of reasons for what he's doing and he must have been very close to the action during the long election process. Lewis often had something very useful to say in the middle of difficult circumstances, so to me this is an indicator of this being even more difficult and I wish there would be a transition.

Probably the thing that got me was the Russia part. It just feels like the beginning of another Cold War.

Yeah, I know. The Cold War ended because the USSR gave up control of territory --and became an essentially one party capitalist rather than communist state. The Berlin Wall marked the division between the communist and the capitalist world views. It was argued and proposed that the Soviet bloc wanted to expand its influence and spread communism. That is basis for the animus between the "free world" and communist Korea, China, and Vietnam. But, China started it's move toward participation in the capitalist world much earlier than Russia. Compare the products in or outside your house from Russia v. China.

There still is a cold war in the sense of a struggle against any socialist regime, and any nation associated with socialism. However, the cold war with the USSR was based on military and political expansion, not economic expansion. Today, no one is arguing or cares that Russia is trying to expand economically. The concern --as in the last few years with the Crimea and Ukraine-- is about how Russia is using its military influence outside of Russia. Remember, we asked the question years ago. Is Ukraine its own country? If it is, blah blah blah. The response, though, was that Russia had a right to get involved there. I don't want to go over the details of the argument. I'm only pointing out that some people feel that the Ukrainians can ally with NATO just as rightfully as Assad can ally with Russia.

I don't believe that US relations with Russia should be poor. I think that Russia (and the old USSR) had valid complaints about the west. I know very well about the CIA adventures in other countries. I also think, however, that nothing the US has done makes anything anyone else does right or wrong. The USSR's support of nations screwed over by the US is commendable. I'm just pointing out that I'm not against Russia in any way. I'm also fond of the sayings, "Doveryai, no proveryai" and "poverit' svoim glazam."

"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."

“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”

― Theodore Roosevelt

An American president really said that Ah, it brings to mind the Pledge of Allegiance.

"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."

That basically however black people protest they are seen as wrong. If they say black lives matter they are wrong, if an athlete takes knee they are wrong and now if a congressmen doesn't show up then he is in the wrong.

Essentially any form of protest or free speech must be kept silent or black people are seen as inciting voilence.

That basically however black people protest they are seen as wrong. If they say black lives matter they are wrong, if an athlete takes knee they are wrong and now if a congressmen doesn't show up then he is i the wrong.

There's a great poem about that issue. But, it's worse than that. Not only are they wrong, they're considered the cause of the problem. It was true for all the abolitionists (and even why Lincoln was assassinated). It was also true for MLK and John Lewis. Both were called instigators and troublemakers. Lewis survived, but there's a list of people (not just Black) who were murdered for wanting to vote or equal rights. Otoh, if a Malcolm X says that people who come to one's house with torches should be treated the way John Wayne would, they say he's promoting violence. So, either way, preach peace like King, or self-defense like Malcolm; damned if you do, damned if you don't. Malcolm asked "what do you call a Black man with a PhD?" Anyway, Remember the cop who complained that officers had treated him like he was just another Black man? http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2016/12/02/ ... ty-police/

"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."

Yeah Steve, I am not surprised that people can become so bitter and apathetic to the point to which they don't bother voting.

I recall the right wing talking point that Obama incited voilence by saying that if he had a son then he would look like Trevon Martin expressing what most in the black community felt (that Trevon could have been anyone's son) and that was seen as inciting voilence. Sounds crazy to me just typing it. What a jump!

Obviously some don't believe that minorities are treated any differently perhaps this will help them.

grzegorz wrote:Yeah Steve, I am not surprised that people can become so bitter and apathetic to the point to which they don't bother voting.

I recall the right wing talking point that Obama incited voilence by saying that if he had a son then he would look like Trevon Martin expressing what most in the black community felt (that Trevon could have been anyone's son) and that was seen as inciting voilence. Sounds crazy to me just typing it. What a jump!

Obviously some don't believe that minorities are treated any differently perhaps this will help them.

Michael wrote:Wow. Congressman John Lewis says he doesn't believe Trump is a legitimate president because of a conspiracy that involved Russia helping to destroy the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. Says he will not attend the inauguration and it will be the first time he's missed one.

I disagree with Lewis' stance on this in general, that it's too divisive, especially coming from him, but I'm sure that's his point. I also don't believe Russia and Putin should be blamed for Trump's election. Like Putin said, is America a banana republic? Can it not control its own elections?

Michael wrote:I disagree with Lewis' stance on this in general, that it's too divisive, especially coming from him, but I'm sure that's his point. I also don't believe Russia and Putin should be blamed for Trump's election.

I found an article that discusses Rep. Lewis' statements that Trump is illegitimate. It says there were better reasons Lewis could have given and that blaming Russia is like the red-baiting that was used as an excuse for the police and FBI to fight the civil rights movement.

Sure, there may be better reasons for his refusal to attend. But, it's not the first inauguration he's missed. If people don't like his particular reason in this case, fine; but, it says nothing about the "civil rights establishment" because there is none. There shouldn't even be a need for one. "Civil rights" meant and means everyone having the same rights. So, I guess I'm on the side of "civil rights," and I don't even need a leader to tell me why.

Afa "red baiting," I recall that the FBI (J.Edgar Hoover) charged MLK (and the civil rights movement) with being communist fronts because the Soviets would say "You criticize us, but look at how you treat your own people."

But, it was all an effort to tell people who to hate. Yep, it was the Ruskies at one point. So, now it's the Muslims, Mexicans, or Chinese, no difference. But, that doesn't mean that we should ignore any negative acts committed by any group.

"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."